30/05/2017 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 30/05/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.


With the election not much more than a week away,


the contest for who will get to Number 10 is is getting serious.


After a tricky time following the U-turn on her manifesto,


Theresa May is trying to refocus minds on who is best placed


Jeremy Corbyn won praise for staying clam under hostile


But it seems he hadn't done his homework


Nicola Sturgeon has been launching the SNP manifesto this morning.


They're promising a big increase in public spending,


a rise in income tax and a new immigration policy for Scotland.


And we'll be talking about the newest addition


I don't mean to be rude. You seem to be a bit of a glumbucket. Are you


enjoying the campaign? And with us for the whole of the


programme today, it's the former cabinet minister and now Times


columnist Michael Gove. He's hoping to be elected


again as an MP next week. He was the Justice Secretary


until he ran against Theresa May for the leadership of


the Conservative Party. But he says she showed very good


judgement by giving him the sack - and the highlight on TV


wasn't a Bond film. If you're a political obsessive


like us, it was the first big live television appearance by Theresa May


and Jeremy Corbyn but appearing one after the other


on Sky News and Channel 4. I want to live in a world


that is free of the danger We are increasing the funding


into the health service, and will increase funding


into the health That's why we've pledged to provide


10,000 more police on our streets, and we want a foreign policy that


didn't leave large areas I think what is important now


is that we ensure that we get Free movement is implicit


in membership of the European Union. It obviously stops when we leave


the European Union. The Labour Party's manifesto,


we know the figures don't add up. What is important


is that as we look... Benefits will be uprated,


and be uprated, of course. What we are doing is putting forward


a proposal that means people don't have to sell their house


in their lifetime to pay for care. It means they can pass on savings


to their children and it means There is nothing in this manifesto


about getting rid of the monarchy, which is another thing you believe


in, isn't it? Look, there's nothing in there


because we're not going to do it. Well, we're joined now by the Shadow


International Development minister, Welcome back to the Daily Politics.


Thank you. Before I come to you, I want to start with Michael Gove. Do


you accept that the hubries of calling a snap election which


Theresa May said she wouldn't do repeatedly, meanted you had to draw


up a manifesto very quickly and now you're suffering to are it? No. Why


not? The reason for calling the election was perfectly clear as the


Prime Minister pointed out. 9 Labour Party, Liberal Democrats and


Scottish National Party said they would recognise our progress to


securing a proper Brexit and we needed to have an election in order


to strengthen Theresa's hands. We are seeing that across the country.


People recognising in 11 days' time, after the general election, we'll


send someone to Brussels to see out our departure from the EU. Jeremy


Corbyn and the Prime Minister are convinced Theresa May's the right


person to be in those negotiations. What evidence is there for that? If


you look at the polls, they've gone from a 24 point lead for Theresa May


to anything between a 5 and 14 point lead. Most of the questions last


night were on domestic Poking Si. A social care cap. A massive you turn


by Theresa May. Is she suffering from wanting a bigger majority for


Brexit and actually writing a manifesto that's crashed and burned


in terms of social care and pensioners missing out on the winter


care allowance? There are so many questions in there. Try answering


some of them. I will. The first thing is hub rice. We all see when


the election results are recorded whether it is the rights decision to


make. I think it is. We'll see Teresa returned with an increased


majority. How big do you think the majority needs to be. If she gets a


few more seats, will it be worth it? I'm not a commentator. You have a


judgment. My judgment is Teresa will emerge strengthened as she has from


this debate process. You ask about the manifesto. There's a stark


contrast from our deep manifesto. When you say deep. On costing, there


wasn't a cap on social care. Now there S you'll take away the


universal benefit on pensioners in terms of winter fuel allowance.


What's detailed about that? We've had more detail in our manifesto


than Labour has. What's de-day-old about the figures? What is detailed


is we've far more detail on how to fund social care than any Government


hitherto. On the winter fuel allowance and double lock, we've a


far greater degree of detail about how pensioners will benefit. Which


pensioners will lose the winter allowance. Wealthy ones. Cat


guerreised by? Is there a figure? I'm responding on the basis you


have' a pre-conceived notion. You've bout into a... That won't get you


away from putting a figure. Pensioners will be worried about it.


Of course they are worried about it. There has been a deliberate attempt


by Labour in order to terrify pensioners. In fact, as Teresa's


clarified, pensioners will have the reassurance of knowing there will be


a cap on the amount that's paid. When it comes to getting the numbers


right, Barry Gardiner, your party, it seems, has not learnt lessons


following the fiasco of the police numbers. An another key policy


announcement by Labour today on childcare and your leader Jeremy


Corbyn didn't know how much it would cost. Let's take a listen.


How much will it cost to provide un-means tested childcare for 1.3


It will obviously cost a lot to do so, we accept that.


The point I'm trying to make is we are making it


universal so that we are in a position to make sure that every


At the moment, get free places will continue to get them.


Those that have to pay won't and we'll collect


the money through taxation, mainly through corporate taxation.


I'll give you the figure in a moment...


You're logging into your iPad here, you've announced a major


policy and you don't know how much it will cost?


Can I give you the exact figure in a moment?


Isn't this exactly the issue with people and


the Labour Party - which came up under Gordon Brown - that we cannot


All of our manifesto is fully costed and examined.


But you're holding your manifesto, you're flicking


through it, you've got an iPad there, you had


a phone call while you were


in here, and you don't know how much it is going to cost?


Can we come back to that in a moment?


This is a policy you're launching today, Mr


Corbyn, and you don't know how much it is going to cost.


How much will it cost? ?4.8 billion for the childcare. .5 billion for


the restoration of over 1,000 Sure Start centres the Government have


closed down. In terms of capital to increase the available childcare


spaces, it will cost ?2.7 billion. The point I make is this. It wasn't


the figure wasn't there or hadn't been costed. This is a rapid-fire


general election campaign in which people, politicians are under


spotlight. Do you know the answer to this? Do you know the answer to


this. If I asked Michael, what was it you spent on early years


education in the last year as your administration of Secretary of


State, do you know the figure? No. ?2.9 billion. What was it you spent


on five-16 on education? Year by year? Year by year. By the time of


the end of process, it was about ?40 billion. You've made your point. The


point for the taxpayer is they want to be reassured that certainly their


party leaders and front bench spokes people do know how much it will


cost. Otherwise... Joe the point is Labour want to sampling on spending


but don't care how much it will cost? We do know. That's why we've


produced this document. Jeremy Corbyn didn't. We are uniquely as a


party, having produce add document, funding Britain's future, that sets


out clearly what those costs are. Which the Conservatives don't have.


It is about as reliable as a pension document? When in fact you asked


whether he knew... Hang on. Go on. When you asked Michael, whether he


knew how much or how many pensioners would lose out the winter fuel


allowance, he didn't give you any answer. There are two answers out


there from respectable organisations. One says it might be


as many as ten million and the other six million. Michael didn't want to


give that figure. They haven't been stated. Don't talk over each other.


Let's talk about other figures. Your leader does not know what a flagship


policy costs. I'm sorry, he does. He couldn't remember it in an instant.


Is that acceptable in the middle of an election campaign? It is not just


the childcare policy. You have this document Funding Britain's Future.


In that debate, he was asked about benefits being uprated or frozen. In


your manifesto, which I have here and the detail about benefits, it


doesn't say you'll uprate all benefits which is what Jeremy Corbyn


said in last night's debate. The reason is because the uprated


benefit is costed in the Government red book. That's why it doesn't need


to be costed here. Will it be frozen. For people on benefits, this


is important. Is Labour going to continue with a four-year freeze on


all benefits, which is what the Government's doing. Again a figure


not in their manifesto. It could cost ?11 billion to people on


benefits. Are you going to uprate them or freeze them? Jeremy's been


clear they will be uprated every year. Job-seekers allow anxious


and... He did not say all benefits. He said uprating benefits. That does


not mean all benefits. Which ones? You made the point. I'm asking the


questions here. I know, this is a good question. Which one? Michael


also made the point you said people should know when they're launch can


a policy. You will remember earlier in this campaign, Michael Hammond,


Philip Hammond. Philip Hammond, when he was asked the cost of HS2 said it


was ?32 billion. It is ?57.5 billion. The my point is these are


the nit-picking things... They're important though, Barry Gardiner. It


is important to know which benefits will be uprated? I've set out


clearly what the benefits for childcare are. Where that money's


coming from. We've costed it. What other benefits will be uprated? Are


you going to uprate universal credit? All aspects of it, which you


could say you got from Jeremy Corbyn's statement? What we said is


there is is a ?10 billion, as yet unallocated, it will be ?2 billion a


year over the lifetime of the Parliament, which will be done after


we've reviewed the benefits and looked at the way in which we can


uprate them using that ?2 billion. That's exactly what we said. It is


in the manifesto. It isn't clear in terms of what you'll uprate and not.


Noes physically which but we are conducting a review. If you remember


last night, Jo, when she was pressed, Theresa May retreated time


and time again into, well, we're going to do a review in that. We're


going to review that. We were upfront. We said we've allocated the


money, ?10 billion. Let's put that to Michael Gove. That's the


difference. Green papers, white papers, looking ahead to


consultation, there is nothing specific about the big issues in the


Tory manifesto. When you say people will want to know, they will what


the cap is on social care. Yes, there was. 82 pages of detail. I'm


asking about your social care cap. What is the cap going to be? What


should it be? There wasn't going to be one. There will be a cap. The


Prime Minister... We don't know what it will be? No, we don't. Damian


Green said there would be no U-turn or cap. She had to come out. She


realised it was unpopular. I think there have been more unpopular


manifesto policies, including Labour's defence and... Can you


answer the question on social care cap. The specific question springs


from how we'll fund our commitments. You've Jeremy Corbyn who has zero


credibility and Theresa May who's been in Government... And have


failed on every single policy they've set in 2010. They said they


would end the deficit and they didn't. I can see the twinkle in


your eye and smile on our face. In defiance of the facts. Barry and


Michael. You may be a knock about duo here. You mustn't talk over each


other. The viewers can't hear. Stay with us.


Now, the Daily Politics moodbox is on tour during the election


campaign, and today Ellie's in Luton where she's been asking


what people think about the big question of security.


I am in Stockwood Park in Luton, to be precise. The election campaign


was postponed last week following the tragic events in Manchester and


when it got underway, the parties were talking about that big issue of


security. Specifically, the Conservatives promised a commission


on tackling extremism. The Labour Party promised 10,000 new police


officers and the Conservatives spent the weekend attacking Jeremy Corbyn


on his links to the IRA during the troubles. Luton is home to two


relatively safe Labour seats but it is the kind of place the Tories have


their eyes on if they are to pull off that big landslide. It is a good


place to ask the question on who you trust more on the question of


national security, Labour or the Conservatives... ?


They are not about taking them out, but making sure everyone is equal so


I choose Labour. Jeremy Corbyn is more trustworthy. Not just that, but


even if you did not know he was a politician he seems like a genuine,


trustworthy possum. Who makes you feel safer, Labour or the


Conservatives. Neither. Why not? I don't feel safe at all. When it


comes to the idea of national security, I would rather trust the


people who have been taking care of it for previous wiles. Rather than


throwing my lot in with a new party. I think fate will decide it... It


won't be fate but the voters! The red rose, the flower. I really like


it. That is why I like Labour. Nothing to do with national


security? I am about peace and love, and unity and care. It is very


difficult on security because of the Trident thing with Jeremy Corbyn.


But I don't trust the Conservatives on anything at the moment. Thank


you. The Conservatives. Why? Jeremy Corbyn said he would not press the


nuclear button. He is an idiot. Labour. The Conservatives... No! I


mean Labour! I said the Conservatives by accident! I agree


with Theresa May but I would rather vote for Corbyn. I like the way that


Corbyn said that the reason why we have got all of these problems in


our own country is because of the fact that we messed around in other


people's countries. Instead of giving these people bread, and a


form of security of being nice to these people, we've blown up their


own children. Labour or the Conservatives? National security...


She is sure! She is striding! We have run out of red balls. Luton has


been Labour since 1997 and it looks like the town trusts the party more


than the Conservatives on the issue of national security. Thank you,


Luton. So that was our entirely


unscientific moodbox. But what can the rather more


scientific opinion polls tell us Well, we're joined now by


the pollster Joe Twyman from YouGov. What is the latest in terms of


people's views on security? The latest data coming after the events


in Manchester show that around four in ten people trust the


Conservatives on defence and security, and around two in ten


trust Labour. It's a margin of two to one in favour of the


Conservatives, and even in Labour voters, only half trust them to make


the right decisions. When you look at individual personalities


involved, half of people trust Theresa May and a third trust Jeremy


Corbyn. About a quarter Amber Rudd and fewer than one in ten four Diane


Abbott. A range of views, no one party completely dominates but the


Conservatives are definitely in the best position. What is driving those


views and opinions in terms of the party they are backing? In a lot of


cases, in terms of who they are backing on security, and a lot of it


is to do with a historical information and the kinds of


narrative is the party has been putting out. Not only during the


campaign but for some time now. Over the period immediately after the


attacks at Westminster but also after the murder of Lee Rigby and


the 7/7 bombings, we did not see much movement in voting intention


figures then, but what we've heard time and again from the


Conservatives in this campaign is that they, are to bore everyone with


this line, strong and stable not only with the economy but when it


comes to security. Divisions in Labour over things like Trident have


not helped to counter that with their own stories. What about


polling in general? Polling in general, we know that the


Conservatives are pushing very hard on the idea of Theresa May as the


person who should take the government forward. Polling on that


remains pretty consistent, about half of people say that she would


make the best Prime Minister, whereas between one in five and one


in four people say Jeremy Corbyn. His ratings have improved and that


gap has closed but not as much as the gap between the Conservatives


and Labour in the dual voting intention poll which was mentioned


at the start of the programme, with a 24 point lead when we started,


since the events in Manchester, that lead was 5% in our poll from The


Times on Friday, and 7% in The Sunday Times on Sunday.


It is growing. Now, we return to normal proceedings, and the question


is, will that bump that the Conservatives enjoyed this far, will


that continue or allow change? As attention moves back to the economy,


childcare, social care and other issues between now and election day.


Joe Twyman, thank you. Michael Gove, let's return to that


issue of security. Theresa May has been running the Home Office since


2010, has she taken tough enough measures to tackle Islamic


extremism? Yes. What could be done to strengthen the government's hand


against extremism? As the Prime Minister made clear in the context


of the manifesto, launching a commission to see how we can prevent


extremism seems to be the next logical step... Really? Isn't that


tinkering around the edges? No, I think it is an enhancement. She has


been responsible for deporting more hate preachers than any other Home


Secretary and put in place the counter extremism strategy which


recognises you don't just seek to prevent violent extremism but


intervene earlier to deal with extremism. She has been clear that


when it comes to the different manifestations of extremist


activity, we need a security apparatus ready to keep us safe and


in contrast to Jeremy Corbyn who regards organisations like Hezbollah


as his friends. You say they have been the right measures and she has


deported a number of hate preachers, I do not know the exact number but


the government says there are 23,000 terrorist attack is potentially in


the country, several thousand being monitored in separate operations,


they are very large numbers. They are concerning, the number


23,000, we need to be careful. It is people who have sympathy with the


ideology rather than those directly engaging in a plot. Could they be


radicalised? Each of these figures, they are figures which are


reflective of individuals and have already been on a radical journey.


The difference between the approach we take and the approaching the last


Labour government is we seek to intervene before people reach the


point where they are ready to press the button on a bomb or pull a


knife. We need to be ready to do the work at mosque and street level to


counter extremism that wasn't being done in the same way by Labour. The


problem is if Jeremy Corbyn has not backed any key pieces of


legislation, when I interviewed your colleague Richard burden than a


couple of days ago, you said it is compensated, you need to look at


separate legislation. But there are key parts of the 2000 piece of


legislation, the power to prescribe organisations and ban them. Jeremy


Corbyn did not backed up. If you take Michael Gove's point that you


need to intervene earlier, Corbyn was against all of those? What


Jeremy has always been in favour of is making sure that we do not allow


the terrorists to dictate the agenda. How do you do that? That


means not letting them undermine the freedom and the right that we have


in this country, the rights for proper judicial scrutiny when you


are being detained. We have heard recently even Tarik before coming


out and talking about internment, and appalling suggestion. All former


heads of MI5 had been very clear about this. You have not answered my


question about why it hasn't been backed by Jeremy Corbyn four pieces


of legislation previously? I have explained, he wants to make sure


terrorists do not set the agenda. The whole threat to this country has


changed from the battlefields of the Middle East to the bedrooms of


disaffected youths in this country. That is why the Prevent strategy,


even David Andersen, who is the previous independent reviewer of our


terror legislation has said that the Prevent strategy causes problems.


Let Michael say... Jeremy Corbyn lead a minute's silence for the IRA


in the 1980s. And calls Hezbollah his friends. The idea that Jeremy


Corbyn is a credible... Shouting does not make your point any better.


I am not shouting. I am making clear how outrageous it is, Barry, that


you are defending as your leader is someone who led a minute of silence


for Republican members... Shouting will not help you, Michael. Answer


the question, why can't you? Does it undermine his credibility? I am


happy to answer Michael's question but let's do it in a calm and


reasoned way. OK? The point is, all that we had seen is in this election


about security and has been trying to focus on smears, newspaper


articles from 33 years ago. Let's focus on the policies. Let's focus


on what now needs to happen to create a safer country. What


policies would you enact? That is what I want to enact... Would you


lead a minute of silence for terrorists? He is dodging the


question. I am not dodging the question, give me a minute to come


back without rudely interrupting, then I will be able to fully answer


what the policies are that we are putting in place. That is why we are


going to put an extra 10,000 police officers on the streets, that the


present Prime Minister, as Home Secretary, cut by 20,000. She was


the one, the moment she came into office in 2010, cut 5% of MI5, 5% of


security and intelligence services, 5% of GCHQ staff. We have only begun


to get back to the numbers of stopping that Bose security


organisations had in the last financial year... That is a policy


you want to increase the number of police officers. Can I say more as


well? In a moment, do you admit cutting those police officers was a


mistake? Don't shout at Barry Gardiner for a moment but answer my


question. Cutting police officers and the number of soldiers in the


Army who had to go out onto the streets of the country after the


Manchester attacks, you cannot fight terror on the cheap? I never


shouted, I ask tough questions that Barry dodged... Go on, answer my


question. I do not think it was, I think it was striking that John


McDonnell when he became Shadow Chancellor wanted to get rid of


special Branch and get rid of MI5. John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn


have been the terrorists friends, and not their enemies, over the


course of their political careers. That is why Barry cannot answer the


question. He led a minute of silence for Republican... Michael, we are


going to run out of time. Answer the questions about previous


associations that have been repeatedly pity you and your


colleagues and Jeremy Corbyn. The point is this. Jeremy answered those


questions fully last night. He said, on the television last night in


those debates, he said the minute of silence that he participated in was


for all of the people who died... That was counted, of course. We have


had nothing but smears from history. Let's talk about policies going


forward. We are saying that when this government has seen a rise in


illegal border.. People coming in over the border illegally rise from


1000 a month to 13,000 a month, that is why we are putting in place 500


further border guards. We think it is ridiculous that you have two


police the whole of the 11,000 coastline of the UK... We have


policies that we want to put in place that will make us more secure.


When you look at the way in which our prisons... Barry, I will need to


share issue and Michael Gove, that is it.


The partisan supporters are throwing everything but the kitchen sink at


this campaign. Adam, can you tell us more? My goodness, what is he


playing? Sorry, Jo. I am playing Corbyn Run, Theresa May is dropping


bags of money on his head. I'm doing quite well but the music is


incredibly annoying. Talking of Jeremy Corbyn, he has a new


celebrity backer. I will give you a clue. An actor from the US, and he


starred in big things like the best Batman film comedy sitcom Taxi and


Twins with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Who could it be? Take a look...


It's diminutiv actor Danny de Vito who displayed his Corbynito


The baked goods were the star as Liberal Democrat Leader Tim


Farron visited a bakery to make some croissants.


Food was consumed over on the Victoria Derbyshire programme


where they set up Boris Johnson's sister on a blind date


Could you make her unsee the light?


Do you know what, I'm not going to answer that!


Good grief, quick, time for a musical interlude.


Conservative friends of India have released this little ditty.


For those who aren't connoisseurs of Hindi pop, they're saying,


"Let's join hands with Theresa May for a strong and stable Government."


In the category marked "slightly less flattering".


This anti-Tory track is currently number two in the UK iTunes chart.


I wonder what it looks like if we mash it up with some footage we


found of Labour's Yvette Cooper teaching people to line dance?


# We all know politicians like to telling lies


# Big ones, little ones, porky pies


# Saying they're strong and stable...#


Wait for it, a giant question mark to highlight


the lack of decent props, I mean, the lack of debate


about environmental issues in the election campaign!


The SNP launched their manifesto earlier this morning in Perth.


It was delayed from last week, after the Manchester bombing.


this is their programme for government in Westminster.


They want to invest an additional ?118 billion in public services,


which they say would put an end to Westminster austerity cuts.


They say they would fund their spending plans


by delaying reducing the deficit and increasing tax revenues by raising


They also want to protect the triple lock on pensions,


stop cuts to the winter fuel allowance,


deliver extra investment for the NHS, social security


There is also a commitment to increase the minimum wage


to the same level as the "real living wage" over


At present, those aged 25 and over are entitled to ?7.50 per hour.


But the real living wage, currently set at ?8.45,


is projected to rise to ?10.60 per hour by 2022.


The SNP would also like the ability to set it's own immigration policy,


which they say would give people the opportunity to come and go.


to stay in the European Single Market after Brexit.


On independence, they say Scotland should have a referendum at the end


of the Brexit process. They previously said at the end of the


next year or early 2019. Here's Nicola Sturgeon speaking this


morning at her manifesto launch. This manifesto sets out a clear


plan to end Tory cuts, protect Scottish jobs,


and strengthen Scotland's hand. It is a manifesto with


fairness, opportunity A manifesto for a country that is


welcoming and outward looking. A manifesto that reflects our belief


in the infinite possibilities open to the people of Scotland if we work


together in the common good, to build the kind


of country we know we can be. I'm joined now by the deputy leader


of the SNP Angus Robertson, Angus, welcome to the programme. I


hope you can hear me all right. Hi, Jo, I can. I may have to hold my ear


piece. I can make you out. What's changed on independence? Why no


referendum now till after Brexit. You had wanted next year or early


2019? Nothing's changed. We've said we are in favour of the people


having a choice about their future when we have clarity, the outcome of


the Brexit negotiations. Its sometimes lost in the debate at the


end of the negotiation, there is supposed to be a period for the


approval or rejection of that deal. Because, of course, all 27 other EU


member states will have a say in our future as well as the European


Parliament. In those circumstances, we feel that is the appropriate


time, when it is right for everyone else to have a consideration in our


future, we think we should have that right as well rather than having


others making decisions on our behalf. Isn't it a massive climb


down to change the timing for that second referendum. In Nicola


Sturgeon's speech there was barely any mention of it. It seems to have


disappeared at all. Is that because the dial in terms of support for


independence isn't moving in your favour? No, whoever was briefing you


on that subject clearly doesn't know their subject material. There's been


no change to our proposals. We've taken the view now is not the time.


The Prime Minister and nicks had a sturgeon are at one on that issue.


It is important people understand what the outcome of the Brexit


negotiations are likely to be. Increasingly, people are right to


fear regardless of whether they voted Leave or Remain, we're heading


for the most damaging form of Brexit. In those circumstances, it


would be right, we've had an election on that in Scotland, where


the party had a manifesto commitment to holding a referendum on the


outcome after Brexit negotiations, we won the election about being


taken outs of the EU. You'll invest another ?118 billion for extra


services. Where will you get the money from? It is ?128 billion. It


is a mixture of ?118 billion by reprofiling the way the UK using its


overdraft. Rather that cutting as deeply as the UK Government is


proposing to do, it is extending that. It includes those on the


highest incomes in the UK seeing taxes go up from 45p to 50p. It


would allow a UK Government and the SNP, this was outlined today, we are


in favour of spending on health in England rising to match that in


Scotland. We think that would be the best thing for the UK as a whole. It


is a fully costed manifesto. Sure, how is it going to come about? How


are you going to introduce a 50p rate for high earners across the UK?


If there's a majority in the UK Parliament to be South, that is what


we will pursue. You're right... You're not a UK-wide party? No. I


think you're suggesting given the Tories are likely to win the


election, we will be unable to see that voted for in the House of


Commons. What we are outlining is what we will support in the House of


Commons if there were a majority to be found, we'd work with other


like-minded parties to deliver changes like that. Why not do it for


Holyrood? You've had an opportunity to increase income tax. You've never


taken the opportunity to put a 50p rate on? On the issue of having a


difference higher tax rate, there is a risk of losing higher taxpayers to


the rest of the UK. You could lead the way. If there's a UK-wide


pressures, we're standing in a Westminster election and you're


asking us about our Westminster manifesto for a Westminster


election. You've never Sloane any enthusiasm for increasing income tax


to actually get more money. You always blame Westminster. Now you're


proposing a UK-wide increase of a 50p rate for high earners when you


are a party in Scotland. You're relying on a progressive alliance


the Labour Party has rejected. In other words, you've put forward a


policy that will never be enacted on the basis of what you put in your


manifesto? You're predicated that on knowledge of the outcome of the


General Election. Do you know what it will be, Jo? No, I don't. Do you


know this will happen? Are you putting realistic policies into your


manifesto rather rather than focusing on the powers have at your


disposal to change the economy? It stands to reason a Scottish


political party will not form a majority in a Government in the UK.


If there is a possibility in Parliament to make sensible


suggestions about having fairness, an end to austerity, better


priorities, protecting the pensions, these are the things we want in the


SNP. There are people across the UK who want these things too. Depending


on the outcome of the election, if there is a possibility like-minded


voices in the rest of the UK would support a more progressive form of


politician, we'd work with them and see changes on this as well as the


likes of protecting the pension. But in Scotland, where we're standing,


that means people have a straight choice. That's what the election is


here between the SNP and Tories. It is only SNP


Parliamentarians who will stand up for these points. Tories MPs will do


whatever Theresa May says to them. You want to control your own


immigration policy. Do you have targets for net migration? The first


thing to say is our key target at the present time is not losing


people. As we already know, we are losing people back to other EU


countries. Scotland's experience is immigration is hugely beneficial. In


the first instance, we are wanting to make sure EU nationals have


guarantees they can remain. We want to make sure further nationalities


outside the EU aren't being forced to leave. That's a very regular


occurrence. We want the Scottish Government and the Scottish


Parliament to have the powers to manage immigration in Scotland so we


can guarantee the immigration levels which are right for Scotland. In the


first instance, that is not seeing it decline. The next question you


might ask is whether that's workable. It is. If it is possible


between different provinces and regions in Australia and Canada, it


should be possible to do in the UK too. There needs to be a political


willingness in Westminster to work with the Scottish Government. I


would invite the incoming UK Government to respect the wishes of


the electorate in Scotland on this and other issues and work with us to


deliver better policies. Now our Guest of the Day,


Michael Gove grew up in Aberdeen. That's a city where


the Scottish Conservatives They're also targeting the border


constituency of Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk which has


the smallest SNP This constituency's most famous


former resident, the novelist Sir For years, the plot in this


constituency was pretty predictable, because it was a safe


Liberal Democrat seat. It was a real page turner


at the last election in 2015 because the SNP


won here but only be It is a gripping


battle between those who want an independent


Scotland and those who support the union


between The Tories reckon they can


hoover up the votes of people who are opposed


to independence. I wanted to show to


the voters I recognised what was at stake with Scotland's's


future in the UK. I don't want another


referendum on breaking away I feel that if the


voters return me as a member of Parliament


on the 8th of June, I would be a powerful voice


as You're not worried that


by quitting as an SNP, Like you had victory


in the bag and you are I've never felt confident


before elections. I work as hard as I possibly can


to secure every single vote. They are more likely to be


scaring our cameraman than talking about what used


to be their signature issue... What I think is really


important is in this constituency and in this election,


the focus is not independence. We haven't had a Tory


MP here for 52 years because we do not relate to their


values. That was the Tory party


of the past, never mind an You will see and I'm


sure you heard today that the Tories are trying


to frame this in a constitutional


question, forget about who we are. The Liberal Democrats say


it is about Brexit as they try not to get squeezed out


the picture altogether... We are the only party


that is pro-union. When I have been speaking


to people, especially are deeply concerned


and worried by Brexit. What will that mean


for this local community? What does it mean


for farming subsidies? This is their campaign


HQ which suggests how seriously they take


the battle for this seat. There is a polarisation,


undoubtedly, between those who are Unionists and those


who are Nationalists. However, during the length


of the campaign, we hope that we are actually going


to cut through and make people realise that this


is not just something about another


referendum but about the future of If you want to preserve the Borders


and keep them a living community, you need to get more jobs


in and better money for the people It maybe isn't as dramatic


as Ivanhoe or Rob Roy in the books he is famous for, but it


is a new chapter in politics here. Welcome to the general


election in Scotland. How far is Ruth Davidson in the Tory


brand? She detoxified the brand... Tories have not appeared in some


seats for 52 years... They talk about pandas and the number of Tory


MPs, there must have been some detox in the brand? What Ruth has done is


convincingly ensured that people have a clear choice in this general


election and in the Scottish election last time around. One party


standing unambiguously for the United kingdom, that is the Scottish


Conservatives studied art and the Labour Party? As we have from Jeremy


Corbyn himself on Sunday night is potentially open to independence. He


changed the text of his speech. He was going to say he rejected the


idea of independence. He watered it down and indicated he may talk to


the SNP and that the same time Nicola Sturgeon was playing footsie


with him, indicating she may support Corbyn. You believe the Tories will


not get a second independence referendum, even if the SNP win the


mandate for a second time at this election, she will deprive, and you


think she should, if they win in a second independence referendum? The


only way to ensure that is stopped is to vote for conservative in


Scotland. When I was campaigning in Aberdeen South with Ross Thomson and


in Murray, that everywhere I went there were people who had been


Labour and Liberal Democrat who were now supporting Scottish


Conservatives not just because Ruth Davidson was head and shoulders


above their own party leaders... She has distanced herself from Tory HQ?


She is standing up for Scotland. She is different? She is actually


surprisingly similar to to reason. They are both churchgoing


modernisers and both people with a strong reverence for the


Conservative Party's traditions and succumbed to be in the 21st-century.


The only way that you can guarantee there will not be the Scottish


National article creating the instability of a second independence


referendum and propping up a coalition in Westminster is voting


conservative in Scotland. He has ruled out any sort of deal... He


ruled out a deal before... However convenient it may be for the


Conservative Party to link Labour and the SNP, you can look at a whole


list of candidates for those constituencies in Scotland on the


BBC website. Although the big beasts of politics


were clashing over the bank holiday, there are some smaller political


animals roaming the Throughout this election we've been


searching out the smaller parties also standing for election and today


we've got the Young People's Party The Young People's Party wants


to rebalance the economy towards young people,


who they say are the most They want to replace all taxes


with a single Land Value Tax They would like to cut


all taxes on private income. They would like to roll welfare


payments into a universal Citizen's Income that everyone


was entitled to. On law and order, they would make


release from prison dependent rather than specifying a


length of time to be served. And they want to legalise drugs,


brothels and fox-hunting. We've been joined in


the studio by Thomas Hall. Welcome. You say you want to


rebalance society and will favour of what you call the productive


society, in mind younger people, why are you pitting generations against


each other? We don't want to do that at all. Old people have young


children and young children, young people, have older relatives and


friends. The real question is whether we pitched the funding of


public services from those that contribute to the economy through


their work, or those that collect the benefits of the country for free


through rents. But you want to ultimately replace all taxes with a


single land value tax. It may be very simple but it is hardly fair,


is it? We believe the land value tax is the fairest of all, and our views


are supported over the ages by great politicians like Winston Churchill,


economists like Adam Smith. And many commentators have argued the land


value tax is the least bad. Right, but it does not take any differences


or variations in population, where they live or their incomes, and what


they do? I will say it is quite the opposite. Those that occupy valuable


locations currently enjoy the value added by all of society for free.


Council taxes there but is very regressive. Could you


improve value tax? Indeed, one sensible way of ending up with


results that we are after is a revaluation of the council tax


bands. It has not been done since 1991, probably putting a cue more


bands at the top end as well. Successive governments have shied


away from doing that but basically you want to tax wealth and assets,


and not income? We do not see land as an asset in the traditional


sense. We really want to identify those assets are which are property


in the sense that someone has made them and put work into them and are


theirs, from naturally occurring gifts of nature, if you like, that


everyone contributes the value of them. We see policies from other


parties, that certain industries are in line for nationalisation and


others aren't. You ask, why one and not the other? It comes down to


rent. We understand a water company is different to a social


manufacturer, for example. The Labour Party says they are looking


at a land value tax to replace council tax and business rates, the


Conservatives call it a garden tax. Do you support that? We believe land


value tax to replace council tax and business rates is a step in the


right direction. Where our party stands apart from the Labour Party


is we propose tax would be a replacement far more than council


tax and business rates. We would raise 200 billion from a residential


land value tax. With that, we can replace council tax from stamp duty,


land tax, inheritance tax, insurance premium tax, national insurance,


employers insurance... A whole host of annoying taxes as well. Would you


back a re-evaluation of council tax and properties in this country? No.


Why not? It isn't fair if it hasn't been done since 1991? When you have


re-evaluation of any tax, then sometimes you create new winners and


new losers. And new and fairness. The thing about land value tax is it


is an interesting idea and as we have heard it has been championed in


the past by distinguished figures but always one championed by


opposition parties, like the liberals in the 1920s and 1930s. But


when in government, they have found the process of bringing about the


land value tax five righty of reasons has not been as easy as they


would have hoped. Just because it is difficult it doesn't mean it is not


right. Why is the focus on taxing income rather than assets?


In London and the south-east, your asset has probably owned you more


money than that money you and from your job? I think the best form of


taxation is taxing assets and income, and spreading taxation as


widely as possible. However elegant, I admire the party's position, but


all of your eggs in one taxation basket can be risky. Do you accept


that? No, otherwise we would not be pitching this. Ultimately, all value


is derived from the land we live on. Without it there would be no value


at all. All of those taxes we have on income or capital gain, all of


these other taxes, they are ultimately derived from value in the


country that we live in. So, we think we can simplify the tax system


from 16,000 pages to 100. All parties claim to be able to do that,


except when they get into government they make it more competent at?


Indeed. There must be a reason for that? Yes, the current economy is


based around a small number of people who benefit from the current


situation. The rapidly diminishing number of


homeowners and the young population who don't. Thank you very much.


Thank you. Now, fans of a neologism -


that's a new word to you or I - will have been pleased to hear one


being coined yesterday. and it's been used to describe


the Prime Minister. Here she is being questioned


by the Daily Mail sketchwriter I don't mean to be rude,


but you seem to be Will we see a bit more optimism,


a bit more Boris, perhaps? Because it does seem a very


subdued campaign, so far. Let's talk about this new word


with Clifford Sofield. He works for the


Oxford English Dictionary Welcome to the Daily Politics.


Glumbucket, a new word for you? It is a new word for me but it is not a


new word. It has been used before. It isn't in the dictionary. We


haven't had the chance to research it completely that this morning I


came across a few examples from newspaper columns and one of my


colleagues and examples on Twitter going back to 2012. I was really


interested to learn that in 1923, the New York Times printed an


article which described David Lloyd George as a green bucket, meaning a


pessimist. After he left Downing Street and he had a pessimistic view


of your's future prospects. -- gloombucket. And how do you write


it, with a hyphen or without? We describe how they are used, I say


that bucket words that are similar to this, like fast bucket or a lard


bucket, or a loved bucket are generally written with a hyphen, or


as a single word... I have seen glumbucket both ways. Will it make


it into the dictionary? We will wait and see, whether or not to include a


word depends on how widely it is used and how long it continues to be


used. We are monitoring glumbucket and we'll find out! Stay with us,


Michael Gove, do you think that is the correct assessment, a glumbucket


for the Prime Minister? And it is a fair assessment? No, I think of


glambucket... Clifford, what you think of that? Glambucket,


pronounced as" Lambooij K"? Tell us about other -- tell us about


other words like Philip, they are words that have evolved over time?


-- filibuster. They describe a particular thing. Whether glum


bucket will become part of parlance in future depends on whether people


continue to use it. It is up to the British people to decide! Any other


phrases which caught your eye during the election? I had to do some


interviews about mugwump, an old political coal word going back to


the early 19th century which had a lot of currency, and the late 19th


century regarding US presidential elections. IC, will you be advising


the campaign to take your new word on board? Yes, glambucket. They will


be well advised to stay away from these words! I thought you were


going to say to keep away from you! I will leave it up to the campaign


chiefs to decide what degree of proximity is appropriate! Coming up


with these new words and new phrases, I'm doing my best to add to


the lexicon... Clifford so field, I will say thank you and stick to


simple words. Thank you to Michael Gove as my


guest of the day, goodbye! I've had enough spin.


Fake news.


Download Subtitles